natic, compared with the dog, is the inferior
creature in intellect; and, in these cases, the dog has, on your own
showing, the better right to protection of the two.

Suppose he said, Because a man is a creature with a soul, and a dog is
a creature without a soul? This would be simply inviting another
unanswerable question: How do you know?

Honestly accepting the dilemma which thus presented itself, the
conclusion that followed seemed to be beyond dispute.

If the Law, in the matter of Vivisection, asserts the principle of
interference, the Law has barred its right to place arbitrary limits
on its own action. If it protects any living creatures, it is bound, in
reason and in justice, to protect all.

"Well," said Lemuel, "am I to have an answer?"

"I'm not a lawyer."

With this convenient reply, Benjulia opened Mr. Morphew's letter, and
read the forbidden part of it which began on the second page. There
he found the very questions with which his brother had puzzled
him--followed by the conclusion at which he had himself arrived!

"You interpreted the language of your dog just now," he said quietly to
Lemuel; "and I naturally supposed your brain might be softening. Such
as it is, I perceive that your memory is in working order. Accept my
excuses for feeling your pulse. You have ceased to be an object of
interest to me."

He returned to his reading. Lemuel watched him--still confidently
waiting for results.

The letter proceeded in these terms:

"Your employer may perhaps be inclined to publish my work, if I can
satisfy him that it will address itself to the general reader.

"We all know what are the false pretences, under which English
physiologists practice their cruelties. I want to expose those false
pretences in the simplest and plainest way, by appealing to my own
experience as an ordinary working member of the medical profession.

"Take the pretence of increasing our knowledge of the curative action
of poisons, by trying them on animals. The very poisons, the action of
which dogs and cats have been needlessly tortured to demonstrate, I have
successfully used on my human patients in the practice of a lifetime.

"I should also like to ask what proof there is that the effect of a
poison on an animal may be trusted to inform us, with certainty, of the
effect of the same poison on a man. To quote two instances only which
justify doubt--and to take birds this time, by way of a change--a pigeon
will swal